The Department of Justice has launched a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, the writer who successfully sued Donald Trump for sexual abuse — and the probe centers on whether she lied under oath about who was funding her legal battles.
Story Snapshot
- The Justice Department opened a criminal probe into E. Jean Carroll on or around May 27, 2026, focused on potential perjury in her civil lawsuits against Trump.
- Investigators are examining a sworn 2022 deposition in which Carroll reportedly stated she had no outside funding for her legal action — a claim later contradicted by disclosed nonprofit support tied to Democratic mega-donor Reid Hoffman.
- Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche recused himself from the investigation due to his prior role as Trump’s personal attorney; the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois is leading the probe.
- No charges have been filed; the investigation remains in its early stages, with the Justice Department declining to comment publicly.
DOJ Opens Criminal Probe Into Carroll’s Sworn Statements
The Justice Department launched a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, the former Elle magazine columnist who accused President Trump of sexual assault, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter. Reuters first reported the probe on May 27, 2026. The investigation focuses on whether Carroll committed perjury in testimony connected to the civil lawsuits she brought against Trump — cases that resulted in large monetary judgments against the former and current president.
The reported factual basis for the probe centers on a sworn deposition Carroll gave in 2022, in which she allegedly stated she had no outside funding supporting her legal action against Trump. That claim later came under scrutiny after it was disclosed that a nonprofit organization with ties to Democratic donor Reid Hoffman had provided financial support connected to Carroll’s litigation costs. Prosecutors are examining whether Carroll’s deposition statement was knowingly false — the legal standard required to sustain a perjury charge.
Recusal, Leadership, and the Appearance of Politics
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche recused himself from the Carroll investigation because of his prior work as Trump’s personal defense attorney. The U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois has been assigned to lead the criminal probe. The recusal is a standard conflict-of-interest measure, but it has done little to quiet critics who argue the investigation is politically motivated — a charge the Justice Department has not publicly addressed, having declined to comment on the matter entirely.
Carroll’s attorneys have previously argued that the funding arrangement was entirely above board. Attorney Roberta Kaplan stated in an April 2023 letter that Carroll operated under a contingency fee arrangement and that any nonprofit support to offset costs was secured only after the original complaint was filed. Carroll’s legal team has maintained that the timing and structure of the funding arrangement did not contradict her deposition testimony. The trial judge in the civil case, Judge Lewis Kaplan, reportedly barred Trump’s attorneys from questioning Carroll about the funding at trial, though the basis for that ruling has not been fully detailed in public reporting.
Civil Verdicts Stand — But Perjury Is a Separate Legal Question
Two separate civil juries found Trump liable in Carroll’s lawsuits, and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed those verdicts. Carroll was awarded $5 million in the first case, with larger total damages across the related litigation. Those civil findings remain intact and are separate legal proceedings from the new criminal probe. A criminal perjury investigation does not revisit or overturn the civil verdicts — it asks only whether Carroll made knowingly false statements under oath during the discovery process.
The distinction matters. Perjury charges require prosecutors to prove that a witness knowingly made a false statement on a material fact while under oath — a high bar. The available reporting confirms only that a probe has been opened, not that charges are imminent or that investigators have concluded Carroll lied. What the investigation does signal is that the Justice Department found sufficient basis to open a formal criminal inquiry into statements Carroll made during litigation that produced hundreds of millions of dollars in civil judgments. Whether that inquiry leads to charges will depend on evidence the public has not yet seen.
Sources:
[1] Web – BREAKING: DOJ Launches Criminal Investigation Into Trump Rape Accuser …
[2] Web – DOJ launches criminal probe into E. Jean Carroll, sources …
[3] YouTube – DOJ opens criminal probe into Trump accuser E. Jean Carroll
[4] Web – DOJ launches criminal probe into E. Jean Carroll, source …
[5] YouTube – Justice Department launches criminal investigation into E. …
[6] YouTube – DOJ launches criminal probe into E. Jean Carroll, sources …
[7] YouTube – US Attorney for Northern District of Illinois leading criminal …
[8] Web – DOJ launches criminal probe into E. Jean Carroll: Sources
Far braver than me, I would not sink anything into Carroll.
I still say that if she had experienced the Executive Branch, that she would still be moaning the Star-Spangled Banner, which why I say she perjured herself.